I use a Behringer X32 rack with a couple digital snakes to route audio between 20 or so radios, software defined receivers, online broadcasts and other audio sources, and it's one of the most powerful pieces of technology in my lab/office.
The quality however of the X32 leaves a little bit to be desired. The power supply died in it due to fault capacitors (I was able to replace them myself) and the rotary switches on the rack unit itself no longer work (I remote control the box anyway) but.. I've been able to look past all this because the sheer power of the tech is unbeatable for my use case. Running a single CAT-5 connection from my detached lab/rack to my office in the house with 32 channels of AES audio is amazing stuff for me.
I agree. If this was Oracle I might not have too difficult of a time believing this is all of the story. But I do think in this case there is more to the story.
> If you're flying in and out of KDFW you should have no trouble with a future Class B KAUS :-)
Given my experience navigating the already PITA Bravo shelves in DFW (don't bust through those without an explicit clearance) and/or getting a Bravo clearance which adds to significant pilot workload, I'll take just flying over the charlie at 5500 and taking it easy while on flight following :) Also remember that Bravo airspace traditionally extends to 10,000 feet or more, so the considerations there for VFR traffic are significant.
Some bravo clearances are easy: "Cleared into the Bravo, direct to KXYZ, 4500 feet", others are "Expect vectors" and now you are flying around under direct control of a controller vectoring you around numerous aircraft for 45 minutes or more... yuck (or fun).
KAUS might be the most classic example of Class C airspace in existence. They only have 3 App/Dep positions with a spare 4th, and the top of the charlie is 4500 feet. I can overfly that in a light sport.
Austin airspace isn't nearly as busy as you make it out to be.
And in the context of this incident, arguing that KAUS needs to be upgraded to a Class B is kind of non-sequitur. A class B wouldn't solve anything except to make the area airspace wildly more restrictive.
believe it or not, this controller is a known problem child in the ATC world and has been shuttled around to multiple facilities all the while filing EO complaints against the FAA any time he was in trouble for anything.
It was without a doubt a performance problem with the tower controller.
FedEx deserves all the credit for avoiding a disaster. As soon as they got their clearance to land, they called back to clarify and verify it. So, they knew that this was going to be a close one, and you can bet that they were ready to go around and abort the landing before they every broke out below minimums and saw the Southwest on the roll.
FedEx knew it was going to be ugly, and they were already ready for the go around.
It is well known in the ATC community that this tower controller that was responsible for this incident was a problem child. He had been shuttled multiple times between facilities as a poor performer and was well known for filling EO complaints against the FAA for performance actions taken against him.
Class B criteria is > 300K operations annually - ~200K is KAUS.
KSTL and KMCI were formal airline hubs and are still Class B most likely due to legacy assignments. It's a lot harder for the FAA to "demote" a piece of airspace vs "promote" one.
I'm curious as to what you think upgrading KAUS to Class B would exactly accomplish, especially in this scenario? This was a runway localized mistake by the controller. Also, the word in the ATC community is this tower controller had been moved around the NAS multiple times as a problem child.
KSAT's airspace (not the airport, the airspace) farther south is FAR busier than KAUS and is considered some of the busiest airspace in the county due to multiple military fields in the area, extensive military training, etc. And it's also Class C airspace.